Healthcare Fraud Investigations: Preparation and Response Strategies

1. Healthcare Fraud Investigations:Preparation andResponse Strategies Bill Mathias 410.347.7667 wtmathias@ober.com

2. Morass of Medicare “There can be no doubt but that the statutes and provisions in question, involving the financing of Medicare and Medicaid, are among the most completely impenetrable texts within human experience. Indeed, one approaches them at the level of specificity herein demanded with dread, for not only are they dense reading of the most tortuous kind, but Congress also revisits the area frequently, generously cutting and pruning in the process and making any solid grasp of matters addressed merely a passing phase.” Chief Judge Ervin United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Rehabilitation Association of Virginia v. Kozlowski, 42 F. 3d 1444, 1450 (4th Circuit 1994)

3. Why Are Internal Investigations Important? • Enforcement remains aggressive • Federal Level • State Level • Increasing promotion of self-identification and self-disclosure • Government continues to view Fraud, Waste, and Abuse as a significant source of revenue 3

4. Have You Seen the OIG’s Website Lately? 4

5. Fighting Fraud is Good Investment • The return-on-investment (ROI) for Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control (HCFAC) program • Since 1997, $4.9 returned for every $1.0 expended. • 3-year average (2008-2010), $6.8 returned for every $1.0 expended 5

6. “Health Care in the New Millennium”

7. When Must You Investigate? • Any time there is: • An allegation of a violation of law. • A suggestion of improper conduct. • A potential for an overpayment by the government. • A potential for a significant overpayment by a commercial insurer or other third-party payor. • A potential for whistleblower activity.

8. How Much Must You Investigate? • Depends on the facts. • Initially, need to investigate enough to gauge the credibility of the allegation. • Believable on its face • Documentary evidence exists • Dollar amount of potential exposure impacts practical decisions regarding scope, depth, and personnel involved in investigation.

9. Who Should Investigate? • Different categories of problems are best investigated by different personnel: • Human resources issues (such as sexual harassment or discrimination) should generally be investigated by the HR Department and/or employment counsel. • Other general issues (non-criminal in nature, unlikely to result in substantial civil liability) can be initially investigated in-house. • Need to consider whether attorney-client privilege may be important – involve counsel (in house or outside).

10. Who Should Investigate? • Criminal issues or issues likely to result in significant civil liability (whistleblower situations, high dollar overpayments, systemic problems) should not be investigated without the assistance of legal counsel. • Attorney-client privilege important – may want outside counsel involved to strengthen argument supporting attorney-client privilege. • Different categories of problems are best investigated by different personnel:

11. Identifying Issues • What wrongdoing has already been identified? • What other wrongdoing might be uncovered by an investigation?

12. Identifying Issues • What are the potential risks and benefits of an investigation? • Risks include costs and disruptions • Risk/Benefit of potentially uncovering unknown additional issues • Benefits include potential advantages of early disclosure, cooperation with any government investigation, and potential for preferred treatment under sentencing guidelines and civil penalty provisions.

13. Identify Individuals • Who is likely to have relevant information about the case?

14. Preserve Relevant Documents • Don’t destroy documents • Suspend routine document destruction. • Destroying relevant information could be viewed as criminal obstruction. • Destroying relevant information could ultimately lead to a negative inference by the judge and/or jury as to why documents were destroyed. • Issue litigation hold memo • All persons likely to have potentially relevant documents • All potentially relevant documents (including home computers of employees)

15. Identify Investigative Personnel • Investigations of serious issues (large amounts at stake, criminal issues) should be managed by counsel. • Who should direct counsel? • Senior management • Board of Directors • Audit or other independent committee of the Board

16. In-house or Outside Counsel? • Advantages to outside counsel: • Preserves independence of investigation (and appearance of independence) • Likely more familiar with process for conducting internal investigation • Likely more familiar with government enforcement tactics and priorities. • May have relationships with government enforcement officials • May be more familiar with the applicable laws, regulations, and the potential penalties

17. In-house or Outside Counsel? • Advantages to in-house counsel: • More familiar with internal politics of organization. • May have more credibility within the organization (not always the case). • May be more familiar with substantive laws and regulations • Even if outside counsel is engaged, in-house counsel plays a key role. • Familiar with the organization -- invaluable in identifying appropriate document sources, interview candidates, and describing standard policies • Assist in gathering documents and other resources and keep costs down.

18. Attorney-Client Privilege • Attorney-client privilege protects communications between an attorney and client • Which were intended to be confidential • Which were made for the purpose of obtaining legal advice (not business advice) • As to which confidentiality has not been waived by disclosures to third parties or otherwise • More difficult to demonstrate that communications to in-house counsel meet each prong of this test

19. Consultants & Others • Attorney-client privilege extends to agents retained by the attorney to assist in providing legal advice to the client. • Applies to secretaries and clerks • Also applies to investigators, interviewers, technical experts, accountants, consultants, and other specialists. • Attorney-client privilege applies to communications with agents as if communications had been with attorney. • Between client and agent • Between agent and attorney

20. Conducting Investigation– Document Reviews • First step is to gather and review documents • Authorized personnel should collect and deliver documents to counsel. • Track where documents came from • Keep confidential documents confidential • Identify “hot” documents • Documents that suggest wrongdoing • Documents that are exculpatory • Documents that raise questions and need further clarification

21. Conducting Investigation– Interviews • Interviews should be conducted in private. • To the extent practical, have witness (associate/paralegal) present during interview to take notes and corroborate your understanding of facts and impressions of witness • Keep notes of interview • Do not record interviews • Do not transcribe interviews • Prepare written report describing facts of each interview • Management should only be present when necessary • Should Compliance Officer be present?

22. Conducting Investigation– Interviews • Employees must be advised that legal counsel represents company, not employees individually, and what they say may not be kept private. • Depending on the severity of the allegations and potential culpability of the employee, you may chose to advise them of the potential need for counsel. • In some instances, company may pay for employee counsel. • Employees must be encouraged to report if they have been threatened or asked to change their stories.

23. Investigation Complete • Counsel should prepare a written report for Client, including • Discovered facts, • Remaining unknowns • All implicated or potentially implicated laws, and • Counsel’s analysis of the facts (and unknowns) in light of those laws. • Report must be labeled attorney client-privileged • Report must remain confidential – limit circulation of report.

24. Fix The Problem • Using the report, corrective action needed to fix the problem • Need to assess compliance process and policies to identify shortfalls in existing compliance programs and reporting mechanisms • Responsible employees should be disciplined, as appropriate • Additional policies, procedures, or reporting layers should be added as necessary to prevent reoccurrence.

25. Now What? • Need to discuss with client: • Whether the past conduct needs to be reported • To whom past conduct should be reported

26. Need for a Plan

27. Voluntary Disclosures • Potential Benefits: • Potential to avoid criminal liability • Potential to minimize civil exposure. • Potential to avoid Corporate Integrity Agreements. • Potential to neutralize qui tam suits

28. Voluntary Disclosures • Potential Harms: • Invites detailed scrutiny • May encourage government to require additional investigation • May result in penalties for conduct that would have remained undiscovered

29. Disclosure Calculus • Decision to disclose should be made in conjunction with counsel, but is a business decision – weighing potential risks and benefits. • Where available, disclosure offers protections too significant to pass up • Useful for substantial violations of law • Leaves as an open question more minor or isolated violations – time + expense + minimum settlement may make minor disclosures prohibitively costly • Continuing focus on compliance programs, good faith cooperation, and prompt disclosure

30. Questions? Bill Mathias Ober|Kaler 410.347.7667 | wtmathias@ober.com